Vital - Kenpom AAC POY (thus far)

[DaveHuskiesFan]

Sadly he's not kidding, he's posted this multiple times. It's this type of insanity that is annoying, it does a major disservice to Vital. CV is a good player who busts his tail but comparing him to El-Amin is laughable.

Agreed. They also play completely different positions.

 

[bmayuc]

Can the narrative that he would be the 3rd guy off the bench on a good team die now?

It actually just buttresses the argument that you are purposefully exaggerating. The argument with CV has always, to me, been a sympathetic one. His skillset is such that in the proper role with offensive playmaking talent around him he could be an A+ player, and has only gotten knocked around here for our (unrealistic) expectations and need for him to be a primary scorer due to our horrible roster/coaching situation during his tenure.

If you look at it like that you can see the point I have been making.

Vitals (+) skills are numerous and elite:

1. Spot up shooting
2. Rebounding
3. Onball defense
4. toughness/swagger/competitiveness

Vital's (-) skills are few but very visible on a team that lacks playmaking

1. Handle
2. Turnovers
3. Decision-making
4. Finishing at Rim

Vital ranks #1 in KenPom because he's an absurdly high producer of basketball value - He does everything on the court, basically. Scores in volume, rebounds elite, steals elite, assists in volume.

If god had only granted Vital a good PG during his tenure, he could have settled into a role off the ball, sat in the corner or on the wing and hit an ungodly amount of spot up 3's, not had (unfair) pressure to handle late int he shot clock, and his career efficiency would be way higher. Unfortunately that is not in the cards for him, and I think we should really drop all the BS and just enjoy the last 10 or so games from one of the premier competitors in the history of the program.

For all the criticism, CV, its been done in love. We always ask the most from those that we see the most in. Thanks for being a husky.

 

[the Q]

Career wise both had the three point line change.

I never mentioned 2point fg% or FT% or true shooting % (which is really just an amalgamation of those three numbers and thus just a restatement on your part).

When I say significant and not significant when talking about statistics I mean statistically significant. Feelings have no bearing here.

If you want to know how I feel, I feel it would be a toss up between the two. CV is not significantly better than Dyson. He brings some different things that could have won him a spot in 09. It would have been interesting to see if the much tougher competition (and perhaps significantly so as per SOS) would have negated his apparent statistical advantages, or if the added talent around him would have allowed him more open looks and freedom. I do not think (eye test) he is near the athlete Dyson was.

Either way I do not think CV would have been a focal point of the offense in those years and would have probably best been played off the bench or as a starter similar to how Rash and Denham went back and forth.

vital having to be a ball handler and create his own shots is a disservice to him. It doesn’t play to his strengths. It would be like designing the offense to have Carlton shoot jumpers from the elbow.

rashad wasn’t asked to do that and his shooting is more efficienot because of it. Frankly you shouldn’t want any of the 3 doing much handling of the ball besides spotting up for open looks.

and Dyson had 2 years with the shorter line. His best year was th e one with the least amount of 3s per game, meaning there was likely some statistical noise to that uptick.

 

[businesslawyer]

CV is better than Dyson over his career and at his peak. This isn't even an argument.

The closer call is KEA. CV does everything just as well with a weaker supporting cast. The major pause is that 1999 was a whole better than sum of its parts team. If you actually changed any of the first 11 off the bench, you might get a different result.

Gordon was clearly better and I don't think CV could complement Okafor quite as well but that was a dominant team.

2006 would have been interesting. Does CV give that team the attitude required to not play so soft.

2009 is the best comparison, as close to a like for like swap with Dyson.

2011, a senor CV might play over a freshman Bazz but why screw with history.

2014, could CV work as a clear 2nd fiddle to Bazz. Boat did his job all season. Would CV and Bazz get along like that if Bazz shoved him?

The most interesting thing that post raises to me is how CV would have helped the '06 team. Would he have started? Heck no. We already had 1 of Denham, 'Shad or Rudy Gay on the bench. But that team's single biggest problem was the lack of a secondary ball handler. The drop off from Marcus to freshman combo guard Craig Austrie was genormous, and Austrie at that time in his career wasn't a good enough shooter to take minutes from Denham and Rashad at the 2, even though he became a much better shooter as his career wore on. Having the option of an upperclassman CV on that team might have made it better as it would have given JC options to play differently that he just didn't have.

Thinking CV was getting serious minutes in '99, however, is laughable, as is comparing him to KEA. That team didn't need more defense from a guard, as Ricky could take the other team's best guard at either the 1 or the 2 totally out of a game, and Albie Mourning couldn't get real minutes on that team as a scoring 2.

None of this, however, is a knock on CV, who at this point in his career plays with maximum effort close to 100% of the time and helps this team win in many ways even on days when his shot is off.

 

[the Q]

The most interesting thing that post raises to me is how CV would have helped the '06 team. Would he have started? Heck no. We already had 1 of Denham, 'Shad or Rudy Gay on the bench. But that team's single biggest problem was the lack of a secondary ball handler. The drop off from Marcus to freshman combo guard Craig Austrie was genormous, and Austrie at that time in his career wasn't a good enough shooter to take minutes from Denham and Rashad at the 2, even though he became a much better shooter as his career wore on. Having the option of an upperclassman CV on that team might have made it better as it would have given JC options to play differently that he just didn't have.

Thinking CV was getting serious minutes in '99, however, is laughable, as is comparing him to KEA. That team didn't need more defense from a guard, as Ricky could take the other team's best guard at either the 1 or the 2 totally out of a game, and Albie Mourning couldn't get real minutes on that team as a scoring 2.

None of this, however, is a knock on CV, who at this point in his career plays with maximum effort close to 100% of the time and helps this team win in many ways even on days when his shot is off.

he’s a 6th man on a good team, mostly due to his lack of ball handling ability. Expecting him to be a backup pg is setting him up to fail for sure.

but we had fans, just a few months ago, saying they’d take austrie over him straight up.

 

[businesslawyer]

he’s a 6th man on a good team, mostly due to his lack of ball handling ability. Expecting him to be a backup pg is setting him up to fail for sure.

but we had fans, just a few months ago, saying they’d take austrie over him straight up.

I don't find that laughable by the way. It's very hard to compare a player who became a fabulous role player for really talented teams to a player who has felt the need to do more than his share on much less talented teams. If I compare senior Austrie to senior Vital, they were both good man defenders and foul shooters. Vital is certainly a better rebounder. Vital is also a better scorer, but it's on very high volume, against overall weaker competition and with many more mental errors than Craig made. I don't think this team would be better if senior Austrie played instead of senior Vital, but I'm also not sure '09 would have been better if senior Vital was playing instead of senior Austrie.

I have no problem concluding that Vital, just based on numbers, can be said to have had a better career, but I'm also not sure UConn would have been better in Craig's 4 years there had Vital come into that spot. But that's not a knock on Vital. Craig started down the stretch on a team that went to the Final Four. And was good enough to allow JC to keep freshman Kemba on the bench. That's not a small thing.

 

[the Q]

I don't find that laughable by the way. It's very hard to compare a player who became a fabulous role player for really talented teams to a player who has felt the need to do more than his share on much less talented teams. If I compare senior Austrie to senior Vital, they were both good man defenders and foul shooters. Vital is certainly a better rebounder. Vital is also a better scorer, but it's on very high volume, against overall weaker competition and with many more mental errors than Craig made. I don't think this team would be better if senior Austrie played instead of senior Vital, but I'm also not sure '09 would have been better if senior Vital was playing instead of senior Austrie.

I have no problem concluding that Vital, just based on numbers, can be said to have had a better career, but I'm also not sure UConn would have been better in Craig's 4 years there had Vital come into that spot. But that's not a knock on Vital. Craig started down the stretch on a team that went to the Final Four. And was good enough to allow JC to keep freshman Kemba on the bench. That's not a small thing.

they really needed Vitals floor spacing and rebounding against much st. They buit that lead because they showed zero respect for wing shooting and destroying us on the offensive glass. Team finally started getting it together but it was too late.

 

[the Q]

I don't find that laughable by the way. It's very hard to compare a player who became a fabulous role player for really talented teams to a player who has felt the need to do more than his share on much less talented teams. If I compare senior Austrie to senior Vital, they were both good man defenders and foul shooters. Vital is certainly a better rebounder. Vital is also a better scorer, but it's on very high volume, against overall weaker competition and with many more mental errors than Craig made. I don't think this team would be better if senior Austrie played instead of senior Vital, but I'm also not sure '09 would have been better if senior Vital was playing instead of senior Austrie.

I have no problem concluding that Vital, just based on numbers, can be said to have had a better career, but I'm also not sure UConn would have been better in Craig's 4 years there had Vital come into that spot. But that's not a knock on Vital. Craig started down the stretch on a team that went to the Final Four. And was good enough to allow JC to keep freshman Kemba on the bench. That's not a small thing.

IMO, his best role would be almost identical to how Calhoun used Rashad. But vital is a better defender and rebounder.

 

[Waquoit]

IMO, his best role would be almost identical to how Calhoun used Rashad. But vital is a better defender and rebounder.

LOL! Rashad was there to shoot daggers! If CV had just one in four years his fans would want him on The Wall.

 

[Shine33]

Did Boatright get drafted? No he was Undrafted and he was a great UConn guard. You can’t define college greatness by if you get drafted. He played in the summer league for the nets. Vital might have a chance to do that. Kid still gives it his all and is a leader. Even in his postgame game conferences he said he didn’t come here for personal accolades he came here to win. Sucks that we’ve sucked for the last few years but he has never given up. I applaud him for that!

Boatright was at least 4 inches shorter than CV. That’s the #1 thing that prevented him from the league. And he still played summer ball.

Vital doesn’t have a height issue. He has an offensive skill set issue. If he had Boatrights offensive abilities he’d prob make a team for at least a short stint or the D league.

These guys have millions of dollars on the line to pick players that are the most talented to play for their teams. There is literally no other assessment that is more important when it comes to evaluating talent.

Yes a lot of our great players were 4 year seniors who didn’t make the league but they were NOT our most talented. Just great leaders.

But even those guys brought us to post season play. CV has to show that he can win consistently and help us to a postseason at least ONCE in his career for me to put Him In with those guys.

I just don’t understand why you guys our tryin to force me to believe he is a UConn great. He hasn’t earned it yet. Call me a hard head but you gotta win games and you gotta be more talented offensively than just knocking down 3s and free throws. I need to see more to put him at that level and I’m not wrong for that

 

[Shine33]

NBA scouts are irrelevant to this conversation. Bouk has finally emerged as our best offensive player. CV is currently better in many other categories. Hopefully Bouk works to improve cause his NBA potential means squat. Glad to have them both.

If we are debating talent then NBA scouts are absolutely not irrelevant at all by my metric. They are the ones who’s opinions on a player matter the most.

And they are ultimately the ones that allow us to have those individual player NBA banners in the practice facility.

Our NBA talent is what holds us above many other programs and why recruits want to come here.

It matters

 

[BigEastLuva]

Dyson was a career 31.8% 3PT shooter form a much closer line. Vital is 35.2%. I'd consider that significant.

Dyson was 42.3% from 2 point shots. Vital is 46.2%. I'd consider that significant as well.

FT% dyson was 73.5%, Vital is 82.9%. i'd consider that significant.

True shooting % Dyson was 50.55% and Vital is 56.6%. I'd consider that significant.

Dyson had higher assist rates, but also a higher turnover rate. I do think Vital overall, is a significantly better player. And this is the worst shooting year of his career so it's similar in that regard (Dyson's senior year was also his worst shooting year interestingly enough).

Statistics have to translate into wins to be valid. How many points/rebounds/assists has CV had in blowouts or games they didn't have a chance to win? Someone said he's great for 36 minutes, which means the last 4 he can be a liability. No matter the stats, when its crunch time, he would rather take an ill-advised shot rather than make a game-wining assist. CV plays hard because he has to if he wants to fulfill his NBA ambitions. Only position for him is the 1 in the Association, and he's a natural, undersized 2. Needs to show intangibles (hustle, leadership, etc.) to be given a chance. He has the respect of his teammates. He is the bridge to the Hurley era. He is complimentary of Bouknight, Akok and Gaff. We will remember CV well when we complain about a lack of hustle next year.

 

[SubbaBub]

Well there is an argument for sure and it's damn close with those 2 (dyson cv) like it or not. Good argument for either side.

As far as KEA man I hope you're kidding? There is not an argument for those 2 to even be in the same sentence, that's ridiculous. #1 a PG vs a 2G who can't handle it half as good and #2 you can have all the heart you want from either of these but the swag and the answers all come from KEA. Not close nor should it be.

Hate to break it to you, but when Moore and K were on the floor, K was the SG. CV as a Senior is better than KEA the freshman who won in 1999. I'm not talking career. The question was could CV start on our better teams. The answer is obviously, yes.

Though as I said, that team was more of a double PG situation, like Ollie and Sheffer. Kemba/Bazz, Bazz/Boat, and even Price/Dyson were double combo guard lineups.

Brown/Gordon was the only FF team with a true 1/2 lineup.

 

[SubbaBub]

IMO, his best role would be almost identical to how Calhoun used Rashad. But vital is a better defender and rebounder.

Not the same player. Rashad was a spot shooter only. CV leads the team in most offensive categories. In terms of supoorting cast, he is closer to Chris Smith, though nowhere near as good as Smith, who was national POY candidate.

Anyway, CV/Rashad is a lousy comparision. May as well compare him to Denham Brown or Rashmel Jones. Rashad is the best sixth man not named 1994 Ray Allen.

 

[superjohn]

Hate to break it to you, but when Moore and K were on the floor, K was the SG. CV as a Senior is better than KEA the freshman who won in 1999. I'm not talking career. The question was could CV start on our better teams. The answer is obviously, yes.

Though as I said, that team was more of a double PG situation, like Ollie and Sheffer. Kemba/Bazz, Bazz/Boat, and even Price/Dyson were double combo guard lineups.

Brown/Gordon was the only FF team with a true 1/2 lineup.

You're digging and throwing the dirt on top of yourself. Not going to tear everything you say apart because it's not worth it but Khalid won it in '99 as a sophomore.

 

[SubbaBub]

Sadly he's not kidding, he's posted this multiple times. It's this type of insanity that is annoying, it does a major disservice to Vital. CV is a good player who busts his tail but comparing him to El-Amin is laughable.

KEA played with how many NBA players? Is CV playing with a POY finalist who sucked up all of the defensive attention? Does CV have viable interior players? Does CV play in a fastbreak easy basket offense? Does it actually work that way?

If you just look at their respective games, KEA is a better facilitator and finisher at the rim. CV is a better defender, rebounder. They are about the same in overall scoring and FT shooting. Either could play on just about any UConn team.

KEA isn't starting in 2004 or 2011 either, but you guys sure do have your favorites.

 

[mauconnfan]

Hate to break it to you, but when Moore and K were on the floor, K was the SG. CV as a Senior is better than KEA the freshman who won in 1999. I'm not talking career. The question was could CV start on our better teams. The answer is obviously, yes.

Though as I said, that team was more of a double PG situation, like Ollie and Sheffer. Kemba/Bazz, Bazz/Boat, and even Price/Dyson were double combo guard lineups.

Brown/Gordon was the only FF team with a true 1/2 lineup.

Hate to break it to you but KEA was a sophomore when they won the title and at no point was CV as good as KEA. This isn't close honestly. There were a lot of minutes KEA played the PG alone with a bigger lineup also and Rip as his 2 as well as with Mouring. Again bad comparison but they are guards and someone already made the comparison but certainly not me.

 

[mauconnfan]

KEA played with how many NBA players? Is CV playing with a POY finalist who sucked up all of the defensive attention? Does CV have viable interior players? Does CV play in a fastbreak easy basket offense? Does it actually work that way?

If you just look at their respective games, KEA is a better facilitator and finisher at the rim. CV is a better defender, rebounder. They are about the same in overall scoring and FT shooting. Either could play on just about any UConn team.

KEA isn't starting in 2004 or 2011 either, but you guys sure do have your favorites.

KEA played with NBA players because he was good enough to do so. A lot of people like Vital a ton but the ones who want or think he's more than he is make it tough. He's fighting for minutes at all on that NC team 98-99.

 

[businesslawyer]

Hate to break it to you, but when Moore and K were on the floor, K was the SG.

This is just wrong. Khalid ran the team from the point. On offense, Ricky was a 1 that played mostly as a 2, even though he was not as good a shooter as you'd normally want. On defense, Ricky and KEA shifted game to game between the 1 and the 2, with Ricky guarding whichever position that Calhoun thought could hurt us more against that opponent.

 

[Lefty2one]

Seems like a lot of people see what they want to see.

There's some fantastic irony lost on you since KenPom's stuff entirely numbers-based that doesn't take into account many aspects of the game that only the eye can tell you. Poor shot selection or bad turnovers at the worst times, selfish plays, etc. I'm a big believer in analytics but no one advanced stat or formula ever tells the full story.

I truly hope CV wins CPOY and I'm not meaning to disparage one of our own kids but it must be a rough year for the AAC if the CPOY is going to be a guy on a team in the bottom half of the conference standings putting up 14.3/6.4/2.6 on .366/.313/.896 shooting splits. The kid has a TS% of .513; that is abysmal.

Dyson is my least-favorite player in program history but it's straight disrespect to say Vital was a better player. The quality of play that Dyson faced was significantly higher than what Vital has faced. We're a bad team in a bad conference. Dyson was a starter, until his injury, on a FF team in the best conference in the country.

This is yet another discussion that shows there's a decent chunk of our fanbase who don't fully grasp:

1) How far the talent level in the program fell.
2) How bad the AAC is.
3) How much worse college basketball as a whole has gotten in the last decade.

 

[Tenspro2002]

He would be in the role he was recruited to be in, 3 and D guard off the bench.

This. He would be a Craig Austrie type with more athleticism.

Vital was a key guy early in his career as one of the only guys to play hard and play with pride on those KO teams.

He's tough, he plays great defense, he rebounds terrifically for a guard. He gets tremendous respect for all of that.

But his play on the offensive end almost always strikes you as the kind of play you'd expect from the leader of a losing team -- forced drives into traffic, ill-advised and heat-check 3's early in the shot clock, hero ball late.

We're trying to move beyond those habits. That's where the frustration comes from. He was better yesterday, but the lack of winning throughout his tenure -- and his style of play being emblematic of it -- is a reason why he isn't a universal favorite.

 

[BNich]

This. He would be a Craig Austrie type with more athleticism.

Vital was a key guy early in his career as one of the only guys to play hard and play with pride on those KO teams.

He's tough, he plays great defense, he rebounds terrifically for a guard. He gets tremendous respect for all of that.

But his play on the offensive end almost always strikes you as the kind of play you'd expect from the leader of a losing team -- forced drives into traffic, ill-advised and heat-check 3's early in the shot clock, hero ball late.

We're trying to move beyond those habits. That's where the frustration comes from. He was better yesterday, but the lack of winning throughout his tenure -- and his style of play being emblematic of it -- is a reason why he isn't a universal favorite.

Because folks like you want to believe it as so. Thanks for your thoughts.

 

[superjohn]

Because folks like you want to believe it as so. Thanks for your thoughts.

We have a guy who posted this and this is the post you take umbrage with?

CV is better than Dyson over his career and at his peak. This isn't even an argument.

The closer call is KEA. CV does everything just as well with a weaker supporting cast. The major pause is that 1999 was a whole better than sum of its parts team. If you actually changed any of the first 11 off the bench, you might get a different result.

Gordon was clearly better and I don't think CV could complement Okafor quite as well but that was a dominant team.

2006 would have been interesting. Does CV give that team the attitude required to not play so soft.

2009 is the best comparison, as close to a like for like swap with Dyson.

2011, a senor CV might play over a freshman Bazz but why screw with history.

2014, could CV work as a clear 2nd fiddle to Bazz. Boat did his job all season. Would CV and Bazz get along like that if Bazz shoved him?

 

[DaveHuskiesFan]

There's some fantastic irony lost on you since KenPom's stuff entirely numbers-based that doesn't take into account many aspects of the game that only the eye can tell you. Poor shot selection or bad turnovers at the worst times, selfish plays, etc. I'm a big believer in analytics but no one advanced stat or formula ever tells the full story.

I truly hope CV wins CPOY and I'm not meaning to disparage one of our own kids but it must be a rough year for the AAC if the CPOY is going to be a guy on a team in the bottom half of the conference standings putting up 14.3/6.4/2.6 on .366/.313/.896 shooting splits. The kid has a TS% of .513; that is abysmal.

Dyson is my least-favorite player in program history but it's straight disrespect to say Vital was a better player. The quality of play that Dyson faced was significantly higher than what Vital has faced. We're a bad team in a bad conference. Dyson was a starter, until his injury, on a FF team in the best conference in the country.

This is yet another discussion that shows there's a decent chunk of our fanbase who don't fully grasp:

1) How far the talent level in the program fell.
2) How bad the AAC is.
3) How much worse college basketball as a whole has gotten in the last decade.

Lol, Dyson had 1 year with a TS% over 51.3%, and it was when the 3 point line was the same as it is in High School.

If Vital's numbers are Abysmal, what were Dyson's other 3 years? Ultra-Abysmal?

Dyson had a closer three point line in three of his years compared to Vital. Beyond that, you should use your "eye test" to see there's more that goes into basketball than scoring.

 

[ctchamps]

DaveHuskiesFan said:
Seems like a lot of people see what they want to see.

You Replied:

There's some fantastic irony lost on you since KenPom's stuff entirely numbers-based that doesn't take into account many aspects of the game that only the eye can tell you. Poor shot selection or bad turnovers at the worst times, selfish plays, etc. I'm a big believer in analytics but no one advanced stat or formula ever tells the full story.

I truly hope CV wins CPOY and I'm not meaning to disparage one of our own kids but it must be a rough year for the AAC if the CPOY is going to be a guy on a team in the bottom half of the conference standings putting up 14.3/6.4/2.6 on .366/.313/.896 shooting splits. The kid has a TS% of .513; that is abysmal.

Dyson is my least-favorite player in program history but it's straight disrespect to say Vital was a better player. The quality of play that Dyson faced was significantly higher than what Vital has faced. We're a bad team in a bad conference. Dyson was a starter, until his injury, on a FF team in the best conference in the country.

This is yet another discussion that shows there's a decent chunk of our fanbase who don't fully grasp:

1) How far the talent level in the program fell.
2) How bad the AAC is.
3) How much worse college basketball as a whole has gotten in the last decade.

Love the irony on the irony.